Memo to Hillary: You're playing a dangerous game

If the speculation is true about you and GQ magazine, you are playing a dangerous game with the media. This time, you apparently crossed the line.

Washington is buzzing that you or your senior staff (is there really a difference?) ordered GQ to kill a profile of you and threatened to withhold access to your husband, Bill -- the Big Kahuna and former president -- for a future cover story.

Pretty smooth, Senator, but watch it. Don't get any ideas about trying it again.

Show of force

You see, that kind of stuff may work at GQ, which can be loosely regarded as a fashion magazine stuffed with some words. But if you think you can pull the same stunt with other self-respecting media organizations, you might not be so lucky.

Can you imagine what shade of magenta The New Yorker Editor David Remnick would have turned if, say, Hillary Clinton's campaign tried to squeeze him when he worked on his 21,000-word opus on Bill Clinton a year ago?

For the record, GQ Editor Jim Nelson told The Washington Post's Howard Kurtz that the story he killed "didn't end up fully satisfying. ... I guarantee and promise you, if I'd have had a great Hillary piece, I would have run it."

I'm not sure I buy that. Joshua Green, the author of the GQ story on Sen. Clinton, was quoted in The Washington Post as saying, "GQ told me it was a great story and a hell of a reporting job, but they didn't want to jeopardize the Clinton-in-Africa piece. GQ told me the Clintons were unhappy and threatened to revoke access to Bill Clinton if the Hillary story ran."

But Clinton's alleged show of force serves a purpose, too. It demonstrates to the rest of the media -- and her opponents -- that she intends to play hardball, even when such in-your-face brawn is completely unnecessary. She is winning handily, and a story in GQ isn't likely to lay a glove on her.

The apparent move should also confirm to the campaign press corps that Clinton will do almost anything to thwart Barack Obama, to win the nomination and, ultimately, to beat Rudy Giuliani or whatever candidate the Republicans have the audacity to present.

A year ago, when "The Daily Show" host Jon Stewart addressed an audience at the New Yorker Festival, he made an interesting point. He likened the 2008 election to a basketball game. When the ball rolls free, which player/candidate will be the one who wants to control it badly enough to dive on the ground, risk getting a floor burn and push aside anyone else?

Clinton's clear message to the media is that she'll do that.

My message to her: Just don't press your luck.

Obama and McCain stumble

You could say that Obama and Sen. John McCain have struggled lately largely because they have presented sub-par media campaigns. After all, reporters helped build their popularity and give them national platforms.

A year ago, they were riding high. Obama was coming out with his best-selling book, enjoying a very successful press tour and persuading skeptical (read: anti-Clinton) Democrats that he represented a legitimate alternative to four more years of Billary. See related column.

McCain was the people's choice who could come across as a war hero, a seasoned U.S. senator and something of a Bush outsider. Their images looked rock-solid.

Then, both McCain and Obama blew it. Obama didn't really do much worth writing about. McCain morphed into what passed for a Bush confidante on Iraq. Journalists seemed to lose interest or take them for granted.

To impress the media, a candidate can't simply pop in on Jay Leno's show. That could soon turn into a political cliché. When Arnold Schwarzenegger did it, the idea was novel and quirky. When Fred Thompson recently made the move to Leno's couch, it was still original enough to spark interest. But it isn't any more.

MEDIA WEB QUESTION OF THE DAY: Which presidential candidate is doing the best job of managing the media?

MONDAY REPORT CARD: So, some smart-aleck kid at Colorado State University exercised his right to freedom of expression to knock the president in the student newspaper? Big deal. I guess the real story is that university students these days are so apathetic that when someone uses profanity -- oh my goodness! -- to make a point, everyone freaks out (to borrow vernacular from the 1960s, the good old days when everyone was running around saying "F the President!").

READERS RESPOND: "Jon, based on your photo, you look old enough to not be naive about TV broadcasters and old enough to have seen the movie 'Broadcast News.' Your Dan Rather column completely missed the point, which is how much impact and responsibility does a TV anchor have for the news they are reporting. I've not worked in broadcasting but have worked in the business world for 28 years and it seems very naive for anyone to hold a TV anchor totally responsible (or even primarily responsible) for a news story. There are many people behind the anchor with responsibilities for that news story and its accuracy... that is what Dan Rather's lawsuit is all about, not politics. You are way off base on this one." Marilyn Luther

Jon's reply: Thank you for writing, Marilyn...you noted: "Based on your photo, you look old enough not to be naïve..." Now, I know there has to be a compliment there somewhere!

Intraday Data provided by SIX Financial Information and subject to terms of use.
Historical and current end-of-day data provided by SIX Financial Information. Intraday data
delayed per exchange requirements. S&P/Dow Jones Indices (SM) from Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
All quotes are in local exchange time. Real time last sale data provided by NASDAQ. More
information on NASDAQ traded symbols and their current financial status. Intraday
data delayed 15 minutes for Nasdaq, and 20 minutes for other exchanges. S&P/Dow Jones Indices (SM)
from Dow Jones & Company, Inc. SEHK intraday data is provided by SIX Financial Information and is
at least 60-minutes delayed. All quotes are in local exchange time.